It's a boy, and well-named, too

Saturday

Jul 27, 2013 at 6:28 AMJul 27, 2013 at 9:20 AM

By George Barnes, TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

It is always gratifying when the British royal family names a child after you.

I don't know how many of you were caught up in the nearly foaming-at-the-mouth excitement over the birth of Georgie Porgie. I know fellow reporter Donna Boynton was excited about it. She has posted at least 13 messages about the royal birth on Facebook since July 19, seven tweets, not including retweets, and wrote a feature story about it.

I was just amused that Prince William (my middle name without the Prince in front of it) would choose my first name for his son, who is now third in line for the throne.

I have some advice for the very young man who could be king: Ditch the name George. I would never change my name, but I always admired people with names such as James, Peter and Robert who could shorten their names to Jim, Pete or Bob. Geo just never quite cut it, even when they started making the car.

There is not a lot royal about me other than my name. When I was a kid, I preferred to think I was a descendant of St. George the Dragon Slayer.

There was the Georgie Porgie thing, too. "Georgie Porgie, puddin' and pie, kissed the girls and made them cry?…?." Shut up! It was irritating enough to me that I considered going by G. William Barnes Jr. The only reason I didn't is because I thought it sounded a bit uppity. I did change Jr. at the end of my name to II for a while because of comedian Bill Cosby's "Junior Barnes! You gunky!" I got sick of being made fun of.

There have been a bunch of King Georges over the years. We remember George III the best because we revolted against him. He was also known for being mad. His son George IV wasn't much better.

Being named after a king who was known as mad really leaves one with a challenge to rise above. That may be what the thinking was.

I was never called mad, but over the years I had many nicknames, none of which I will mention because gangs of children might start harassing me.

I am sure the royals thought hard about choosing the name George, but I wonder if they remembered Mad King George.

Monarchs and other royalty are always at risk of having someone hang a nickname on them. In European history there have been some doozies. One of the worst was Vlad III of Wallachia (Romania), whom many refer to as "The Impaler"; others like to call him "Dracula," which means son of Dracul, which means devil. His dad was simply known as Dracul and was not as active in the business of impaling people.

In England there is Edmund I — "The Deed Doer," possibly one of the most boring nicknames I can imagine.

Ragnar Lodbrok of Sweden, best known as the focus of the television show "Vikings," was known as "Hairy Breeches," but that wasn't bad. Henry IV of Castille was called "The Impotent"; Robert II, Duke of Normandy, was dubbed "Short Stockings"; and Henry II of England "Short Cloak."

There was also "Edward Longshanks," best known as Edward I, the guy who had William Wallace torn to pieces in the movie "Braveheart."

One of my favorite nicknames was that of John George I, elector of Saxony, better known as "Beer-jug." One of the worst is Byzantine Emperor Constantine V, who was called "Dung-named"

Also pretty bad is "The Cabbage," the nickname of Ivailo of Bulgaria. At least three European leaders have been dubbed "The Bad," although 11 were known as "The Good." There were also three called "The Tall" and one called "The Short." Then there was King Olaf II of Norway, known as "The Stout," and three others called "The Drunkard."

If baby Prince George is lucky he will get a nickname like that of William III of England, known by the friendly "King Billy," or Charles I of England, who was called "The Merry." Better yet would be to start calling the Prince "Mick" after England's greatest royal, Sir Mick Jagger.

Contact George Barnes at gbarnes@telegram.com. Follow him on Twitter @georgebarnesTG.